quote:
Each of these measures establishes a dangerous new principle of acceptable privacy invasion: the creation of dossiers on law-abiding citizens; mandatory self-identification to the police; monitoring of our communications activities and reading habits; the removal of our right to anonymity; and systematic police observation of law-abiding citizens on public streets.
Fact of the matter is, this already happens in America, albeit through several different organizations. There are already police surveillance cameras, we already have to answer to the police when they want to know who we are and the police already watch everyone on the streets, law abiding or not. We already have ID cards, they're called drivers licences. If they put my genetic info on there or retina scans or whatever, then they know it's really me. What's wrong with that? It stops people from using false ID's.
Some of the arguements don't seem to hold much credence to me. Do Canadians not have to answer police when the police ask them questions? Can they just walk away and ignore them? How is that going to be any different then? Don't you have to identify yourself when you're pulled over for a ticket or entering a government building already? What difference does it make if they can be sure that it is you instead of someone who stole your Proof of Identification? Don't the government or state investigative agencies in place have the right to access all of your information such as travel habits, communications, associates, and purchases if you've been brought under investigation for a crime?(depending on the crime)
In so much as watching who you associate with... I'm already in the FBI database for being a possible gang member. Does that bother me? No, not really. I know I'm not and it is obvious that I'm not. I can prove that I'm not and that's the end of it. I'm already careful of who I associate with in todays Democratic, free, and private society because I know there are some freaks out there that I'd rather not associate with.
What I'm seeing here is people flipping out about certain things, most of which already happen. At any point that I break the law all of the records on me are accessible to any government agency that is investigating me. They can pull files from any company that I've had dealings with, be it an airline, a car dealership, or even information from abroad. UNTIL I break the law, they aren't even looked at. There isn't enough manpower in the country to look at MY information much less the millions of others in this country. Personally, I am hardly concerned with this 'invasion of privacy' since I know it already happens. The only change will be we know about it. In that knowing maybe some people on the verge of trying something stupid will be scared away from trying it. I would like to see E-mail be protected like Snail Mail is and I don't support phone taps or satellite surveillence. The latter two of which are far more penetrating an intrusion. Those things too are done regularly, when you're under suspicion. It all comes down to how easy you think it is to be mistaken for a criminal. In my case... even with some of the stupid things I've done and do, not very likely. I find this paranoia to be just that, the initial terror of people who don't stop to realize that this already happens to them every day. I would think that the average person believes that this has been happening for years.
Now, the speaker has some legitimit concerns that this could get out of hand. What I see as a failing in most of these cries against things is a lack of proposed alternatives. If he thinks some of these things go too far he should propose some things that DON'T go to far. Propose some alternatives that will protect a citizen's privacy until it is proven they have broken the law. Privacy is a freedom that we use to shield ourselves from goverrnmental scrutiny, without it we feel unprotected and watched as if we might be attacked at any moment for any reason.
I KNOW I have been under a different country's scrutiny and I have ALREADY been attacked on September 11th for reasons unspecified BECAUSE of my level of privacy. If I can sacrifice SOME of my privacy and still be comfortable... I will. To stop something like 9/11 from happening again... I am willing to go to war. For me, giving up some of my privacy seems like a good option compared to going to war.
GrythusDraconis
I admire a man who can budget his life around his pint of Guinness and I envy a man who's wife will let him. ME, inspired by Suho1004 here.
[This message has been edited by GrythusDraconis (edited 02-04-2003).]
posted 01-31-2003 05:57
